4 ms·

Of course there are. Like I said, Stripe was competition. It wasn't a side-show because it didn't try to change the game without solid analytical data; instead

Of course there are. Like I said, Stripe was competition. It wasn't a side-show because it didn't try to change the game without solid analytical data; instead it just played the same game and tried different methods of achieving the same goals. That's competition: We're both trying to get to the same place, and we're doing it differently. But, again, I don't see the linked site as doing that. Instead, it's trying to say that it can achieve the same goals by playing an entirely different game. And that's fine, if they can back it up. But everything that does that is a side-show until they do. A grocery store isn't competition to Wal-Mart or Amazon. If they want to be, they have to tackle the scale of supply and demand that those monopolists do. If they say "we're doing exactly what they did, just cheaper", that's competition. If they say "we're doing exactly what they did, but we have this localized scheme for deliveries that will save us a ton of money", THAT'S competition (assuming some evidence it's true). If they say "we're going to do something entirely different, and here's a bunch of convincing data to say why that would work, or work better", that is, once again, competition. But if your grocery store says "we're going to do it completely differently, because we are aggrieved!", that is a side-show. There's nothing there to engender confidence. If the store says "we're going to do it completely differently, by doing it backwards because that SHOULD work out better", that is another example of a side-show. The salient bit being that it MIGHT work. That's what's great about capitalism. But you'll forgive me if I don't get too particularly enthused about yet another right-wing think-tank pivoting into new ways for people to invest a ton of money before they agonizingly drag out their corporate demise, insisting that they are doing "fine", the whole time. It's not myopic or short-sighted to contextualize real patterns that you've observed into actionable investment or divestment of interest.

pessimizer 4y ago
> right-wing think-tank Who are you talking about? > invest a ton of money before they agonizingly drag out their corporate demise What is so challenging about the business that they're going into other than the fact that they will be under constant attack by censors and monopolists? They seem to be safe as houses otherwise, considering that they're requiring TINs and EINs from business customers, and W-9s and SSNs from individuals.
- catapart 4y ago
  The people who operate the site are who I'm talking about. And the challenges for the business they're entering in to are scale and compliance. It's pretty wild, to me, to see how many people have to learn this lesson OVER and OVER and OVER again, but it turns out - you can't do ANYTHING alone. No person is an island. If you think you can go it alone, you are simply forgetting the things that got you where you are. And all of that is doubly true in finance where the entire industry is predicated on interoperability. They are trying to do away with all of that and say "I alone can save you". They want you to build an entirely distinct economy, with them, because they can't play well with the existing economy. That's the whole game: "I'll build my own economy. With blackjack! And hookers!" They're saying they want everyone to be able to freely trade, but they're building a separate economy, cutting out the existing financial institutions that don't sign on to their libertarian ideas of a healthy economy. It's a roundabout way of exclusion, but exclusion is the only play they've ever known. And you wonder what the challenges are, of building and maintaining your own sub-economy? I mean, it seems pretty obvious, but if you're really curious, just pay attention to this group. You'll see the challenges play out in real time and, most likely, overcome them.

pessimizer 4y ago

> right-wing think-tank Who are you talking about? > invest a ton of money before they agonizingly drag out their corporate demise What is so challenging about the business that they're going into other than the fact that they will be under constant attack by censors and monopolists? They seem to be safe as houses otherwise, considering that they're requiring TINs and EINs from business customers, and W-9s and SSNs from individuals.

catapart 4y ago
The people who operate the site are who I'm talking about. And the challenges for the business they're entering in to are scale and compliance. It's pretty wild, to me, to see how many people have to learn this lesson OVER and OVER and OVER again, but it turns out - you can't do ANYTHING alone. No person is an island. If you think you can go it alone, you are simply forgetting the things that got you where you are. And all of that is doubly true in finance where the entire industry is predicated on interoperability. They are trying to do away with all of that and say "I alone can save you". They want you to build an entirely distinct economy, with them, because they can't play well with the existing economy. That's the whole game: "I'll build my own economy. With blackjack! And hookers!" They're saying they want everyone to be able to freely trade, but they're building a separate economy, cutting out the existing financial institutions that don't sign on to their libertarian ideas of a healthy economy. It's a roundabout way of exclusion, but exclusion is the only play they've ever known. And you wonder what the challenges are, of building and maintaining your own sub-economy? I mean, it seems pretty obvious, but if you're really curious, just pay attention to this group. You'll see the challenges play out in real time and, most likely, overcome them.